Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Subject | RE: Re: [PATCH] PM / devfreq: Fix build issues with devfreq disabled | From | MyungJoo Ham <> | Date | Wed, 25 Jan 2023 14:46:26 +0900 |
| |
>On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 8:04 PM MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@samsung.com> wrote: >> >> >Sender : Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com> >> >Date : 2023-01-24 00:37 (GMT+9) >> >Title : [PATCH] PM / devfreq: Fix build issues with devfreq disabled >> > >> >From: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org> >> > >> >The existing no-op shims for when PM_DEVFREQ (or an individual governor) >> >only do half the job. The governor specific config/tuning structs need >> >to be available to avoid compile errors in drivers using devfreq. >> > >> >Fixes: 6563f60f14cb ("drm/msm/gpu: Add devfreq tuning debugfs") >> >Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org> >> >> Doesn't this imply that DRM_MSM should depend on PM_DEVFREQ ? >> >> It appears that gpu/drm/msm/DRM_MSM uses PM_DEVFREQ without actually >> declaring the dependency on PM_DEVFREQ. >> You cannot use SIMPLE_ONDEMAND without DEVFREQ. > >Possibly that would resolve some issues, and that might have been my >mistake in assuming that depending on SIMPLE_ONDEMAND implied a >dependency on DEFREQ (which seems like a reasonable assumption, IMHO) > >But AFAICT some kernel configs that could otherwise use DRM_MSM don't >support PM_DEVFREQ.. either way, lets solve this properly and remove >needless dependencies on devfreq. > >BR, >-R
Ok. You are enabling struct and enum only and that looks harmless.
PTAL, Chanwoo.
Acked-by: MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>
Cheers, MyungJoo.
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |